Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Rise of Whatever

eev.ee

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 537 posts

Re: The Rise of Whatever

#411

Post by layer8 »

dalemhurley wrote: post #111

> "live in some futuristic utopia like the EU where banks consider "send money to people" to be core functionality. But here in the good ol' U S of A, where material progress requires significant amounts of kicking and screaming, you had PayPal." I remember when PayPal came to Australia, I was so confused by it as I could just send money via internet banking. Then they tried to lobby the government to make our bankin…

In the EU, the value proposition of PayPal is (1) that it it hello instantaneous instead of taking one or two days like a regular bank transfer, and (2) it doesn’t disclose your banking info to the other party. The first one is now finally being obsoleted by SEPA instant payments.

Re: The Rise of Whatever

#412

Post by alittlebee »

Almondsetat wrote: post #242

The author claims that computers aren't fun anymore and then talks about payment methods and social networks. Not only I fail to see how a website would magically make a piece of hardwars boring, but computers have always been boring and it is the job of the user to get something fun out of them

[dead]

Re: The Rise of Whatever

#413

Post by alittlebee »

cousin_it wrote: post #63

This reminds me of the normie/autistic/sociopath triangle. The idea is that sociopaths can see through normies, normies can see through autists, and autists can see through sociopaths - when there's a sociopath, often the normies in the group will be easily fooled by him, but the autists will be onto him right away. Don't know why that is, but it's true in my experience. Same with AI. I'm notably more autistic (or mo…

[dead]

Re: The Rise of Whatever

#414

Post by layer8 »

nottorp wrote: post #116

Emphasis: ----- This is why I absolutely cannot fucking stand creative work being referred to as "content". "Content" is how you refer to the stuff on a website when you're designing the layout and don't know what actually goes on the page yet. "Content" is how you refer to the collection of odds and ends in your car's trunk. "Content" is what marketers call the stuff that goes around the ads. "Content"... is Whateve…

I upvoted your content.

Re: The Rise of Whatever

#415

Post by globnomulous »

Miraltar wrote: post #362
maleno wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's interesting that practically every time this point is made (and it is made so very often), the examples that are used to prove the point are objective and easy to measure. A 100m sprint time or a calculation of Pi is not the same as a work of art, because they can be measured objectively while art cannot. There is no equivalent in art-making to running a 100m sprint. The evaluation of a 100m sprint is no…

The example might be bad but the argument still stands. Painting hasn't disappeared when photography was invented. Drummers still drum after the invention of drum machines.

Music is actually a terrific counterexample to your point. It perfectly demonstrates the culturally and artistically destructive power of the steady march of progress in computer technology -- which really has led to fewer drummers.

Far fewer people make their living as musicians than did even thirty years ago, and being a musician is no longer a viable middle-class career. Jaron Lanier, who has written on this, has argued that it's the direct result of the advent of the internet, music piracy, and streaming -- two of which originally were expected or promised to provide more opportunities for artists, not take them away.

So there really are far fewer drummers, and fewer, worse opportunities for those who remain, than there were within the living memory of even most HN users, not because some specific musical technology advanced but because technological advancement provided an easier, cheaper alternative to human labor.

Sound familiar yet?

Re: The Rise of Whatever

#416

Post by layer8 »

fsh wrote: post #225
vincnetas wrote: post #65

After reading "...the press release and in the fine print it says that now it can count the number of letters in “Mississippi” correctly or whatever" tried to count letters in another word :) You said: how many letters are in the lithuanian word "nebeprisikaspinaudamas"? Just give me one number. ChatGPT said: 23 You said: how many letters are in the lithuanian word 'nebeprisikaspinaudamas'. Just give me one number. C…

I'm all for making fun of LLMs, but asking this from a software that processes vectors of tokens is a bit silly. The information isn't really there in the input.

Then it shouldn’t pretend to know the correct answer.

Re: The Rise of Whatever

#417

Post by indigoabstract »

ninetyninenine wrote: post #389
indigoabstract wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know what will come in the future, but to me it's obvious that any variation of LLMs, no matter how advanced won't replace a skilled human who knows what they're doing. Through no fault of their own, but they're literally blind. They don't have eyes to see, ears to hear or fingers to touch and feel & have no clue if what they've produced is any good to the original purpose. They are still only (amazing) tools…

LLMs produce video and audio data and can parse and change audio and visual data. They hear, see and read and the only reason they can’t touch is because we don’t have the training data. You do not know if LLMs I the future can’t replace humans. You can only say right now they can’t replace humans. In the future the structure of the LLM may be modified or it become one module out of multiple that is required for agi.…

> In the future the structure of the LLM may be modified or it become one module out of multiple that is required for agi. > The real answer is nobody knows.

This is all just my opinion of course, but it's easy to expect that being an LLM that knows all there is to know about every subject written in books and the internet would be enough to do every office work that can be done with a computer. Yet strangely enough, it isn't.

At this point they still lack the necessary feedback mechanism (the senses) and ability to learn on the job so they can function on their own independently. And people have to trust them, that they don't fail in some horrible way and things like that. Without all these they can still be very helpful, but can't really "replace" a human in doing most activities. And also, some people seem to possess a sense of aesthetics and a wonderful creative imagination, things that LLMs don't really display at this time.

I agree that nobody knows the answer. If and when they arrive at that point, by then the LLM part would probably be just a tiny fraction of their functioning. Maybe we can start worrying then. Or maybe we could just find something else to do. Because people aren't tools, even when economically worthless.

Re: The Rise of Whatever

#418

Post by greyface- »

yieldcrv wrote: post #407
greyface- wrote: post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Its all about blockspace > That was true when bitcoin was 2 cents I largely agree with you, but to nitpick: when bitcoin was 2 cents, blockspace was free, and miners regularly accepted zero-fee transactions into blocks. Today, you're not getting a transaction into a block without paying at least a couple hundred sats. Your statement is true today, but it wasn't like this until April-May 2012 when Satoshi Dice start…

yes, blocks are and were periodically empty if you expected applications to be deployed that would take up block space when used, and were going to build those applications yourself, then it was still rational in 2012 people were describing smart contracts, joint custody accounts to secure assets better, and many other applications that are commonplace and have their own critique and discussion now its like seeing an…

Today, when blocks are empty, you're paying 1 sat/vB. Back then, when blocks were empty, you paid zero. That's the difference between "all about blockspace" and "only about blockspace when you care about next-block latency".

Here's a 2010 Satoshi post in a thread about transaction fees stating "we should always allow at least some free transactions": https://satoshi.nakamotoinstitute.org/posts/bitcointalk/thre...

If you had said "2 dollars" instead of "2 cents", we would be in complete agreement. All I'm saying is that mandatory transaction fees were not baked in at 2 cents.

Re: The Rise of Whatever

#419

Post by 1718627440 »

raincole wrote: post #44
gyomu wrote: post #10

Broadly agreed with all the points outlined in there. But for me the biggest issue with all this — that I don't see covered in here, or maybe just a little bit in passing — is what all of this is doing to beginners, and the learning pipeline. > There are people I once respected who, apparently, don’t actually enjoy doing the thing. They would like to describe what they want and receive Whatever — some beige sludge th…

People will write lengthy and convoluted explanation on why LLM isn't like calculator or microwave oven or other technology before. (Like OP's article) But it really is. Humans have been looking for easier and lazier ways to do things since the dawn of civilization. Tech never ever prevents people who really want to hone their skills from doing so. World record of 100m sprint kept improving even since car was invente…

But you are not allowed to use either until you can already cook and calculate.

Re: The Rise of Whatever

#420

Post by dingnuts »

globnomulous wrote: post #415
Miraltar wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The example might be bad but the argument still stands. Painting hasn't disappeared when photography was invented. Drummers still drum after the invention of drum machines.

Music is actually a terrific counterexample to your point. It perfectly demonstrates the culturally and artistically destructive power of the steady march of progress in computer technology -- which really has led to fewer drummers. Far fewer people make their living as musicians than did even thirty years ago, and being a musician is no longer a viable middle-class career. Jaron Lanier, who has written on this, has…

> which really has led to fewer drummers.

what's your basis for this claim? please provide some data showing number of drummers over time, or at least musicians, over the last fifty years or so. I tried searching and couldn't find anything but you're so confident, I'm sure you have a source you could link

Post reply on HN